Bug#492696: Combining Artistic|GPL-1+ with GPL-2 and LGPL-3+
MJ Ray wrote: > Damyan Ivanov wrote: > > [Please Cc me on replies. Thanks] > > Most of the code is licensed under "the same terms as Perl itself", > [...] > > In addition to that, some icons are licensed under LGPL-3+, and some > > more icons are licensed under GPL-2. > > > > From how I understand it, if we choose GPL-2 for the main code, that > > still leaves the combination of GPL-2 (code and some .png icons) and > > LGPL-3+ (.png icons). Is such aggregation OK? > > If it's mere aggregation, I believe each stays under their own licence. Just to be clear, if it is not mere aggregation, then it is not ok. If the LGPL-3+ icons are required for the program to operate correctly, that is a hint that licenses need to be compatible with GPL-2. Cheers, Walter Landry wlan...@caltech.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#492696: Combining Artistic|GPL-1+ with GPL-2 and LGPL-3+
Damyan Ivanov wrote: > [Please Cc me on replies. Thanks] > Most of the code is licensed under "the same terms as Perl itself", [...] > In addition to that, some icons are licensed under LGPL-3+, and some > more icons are licensed under GPL-2. > > From how I understand it, if we choose GPL-2 for the main code, that > still leaves the combination of GPL-2 (code and some .png icons) and > LGPL-3+ (.png icons). Is such aggregation OK? If it's mere aggregation, I believe each stays under their own licence. Hope that helps, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#492696: Combining Artistic|GPL-1+ with GPL-2 and LGPL-3+
[Please Cc me on replies. Thanks] My upstream uses several licenses and this makes be feel a bit uneasy deciding if they can be combined. Please advice. Most of the code is licensed under "the same terms as Perl itself", which means either Artistic license, or (at your opinion) GPL (any version). In addition to that, some icons are licensed under LGPL-3+, and some more icons are licensed under GPL-2. From how I understand it, if we choose GPL-2 for the main code, that still leaves the combination of GPL-2 (code and some .png icons) and LGPL-3+ (.png icons). Is such aggregation OK? TIA -- damJabberID: d...@jabber.minus273.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
